posted June 20, 2008 10:55 AM         

quote:

---

again that is your perception isnt it. if i act like i know what i m talking about and refuse to change my mind - its becoz i have spent hours of research getting there.i did not believe in asteroids at all. until i saw proof with my own eyes. i wont change my mind and the fact is i dont feel the urge to convert you or anyone to my beliefs.and its not like the theory is changing your destiny...gimme a break, believe what you want.the probability theory is not going to affect your relationships as you may know so i wonder why you are bent on disproving it and getting me to dissect my convictions like your life depended on it ???

---

Your kidding right? This is just a joke right? Please Venus, don't give yourself THAT much credit. You or your life, your theories or anything else of yours does not move me. Again, as it says in plain english in the thread title, I want to DISCUSS... I wanted to understand why the use of tight orbs and the exclusion of large orbs (which is negligent now because you already explained your point) I never started this thread to try and gain a fan club as you would like to believe and in so many words accuse me of. I have said in all sincerity that I like reading your work because it is very imformative. However, its not THAT serious. I am not hell bent on anything and quite frankly, I NEVER came in this thread to get you or anyone else to agree to anything. What, you think i'm some sort of follower that needs everyone to agree with me? Give me a break! And please, the question is not there for you to answer.

quote:

---

that was the whole point-to induce reasoning into something as illlogical as love or in some cases a case of sexual infatuation that leads to disillusionment.u are free to believe what you want, i have said that and i am saying it again.

---

I figured that much, that is why I used the examples I did.

quote:

---

no, again that is your perception. what it means is that my theories are based on the same premise and methodology that astrology was based on..to question the premise is to question astrology......get it ?

---

Please, stop blowing my point out of proportion. I questioned the probability theory you presented about orbs. I didn't question what the Sun, Moon, and rest of the heavenly bodies or planetary orbits meant.

quote:

---

valentine implies love...thats not MY opinion that i am propogating as a FACT , thats an archetype right ???
what comes into your mind when you hear that word ? what archetype does it stand for in our psyches ???
do you think if i post synastry that shows soulmates having Valentine in tight aspects, to make my case ,i m being holier than thou...???

---

I believe in the asteroids too thanks to you, IQhunk, Lara, Darkdreamer, Diandra, Eighth Moon, and a few others. I said you came off as holier than thou because you tried to blow my point out of proportion when you went on your diatribe about how your work is not guesswork and Galileo, and all the other ancient astrologers and what not. What I said in no way needed a response like that. But then again, like you said, its all about perception and I perceived you as being I guess upset for questioning orbs like I was questioning all of astrology.

quote:

---

if you see threads where i take a case study and i dont take large orbs into account its becoz there are soooo many tight aspects .

---

Okay, duly noted for future references.

quote:

---

and FYI, you and mercury can keep calling my self expression whatever, this is a free speech forum , so feel free to rant all you want.pull me down, pull your panties into a bunch , do what you want. its your party.
the truth hurts and having been on this forum i know how personal psychology affects perception, including mine..

---

Now this is just ridiculous. Pull you down? Panties in a bunch? You make me laugh with this nonsense. YOU are the one who became stand-offish. I repeated MANY times that I wasn't trying to offend you yet it seems I must have. We are not children here so please stop acting like one.

Also, i'm not sure what you mean when you say "the truth hurts." Are you implying that about your own case or mine? I'm guessing you are implying that about yourself but I am asking to be sure.

quote:

---

ok again, IF u had read any of my posts correctly or UNDERSTOOD you would have known this...
i have said that a soulmate relationship has atleast ONE aspect..conj,trine sext...etc to qualify as so,becoz of probability as Iqhunk said.period.
all other aspects large orbed included are very much valid...nowhere did i say they wont work synastrically and are invalid.its just that they dont help the probability.
to make it clear..

---

Okay, you have made that clear already which is why I am confused as to why this thread has taken the direction that it has. My only question and issue was the logic and reasoning behind only using tight orbed aspects which again, you have already explained your stance. As far as using probability as a basis to validate using only tight orbs and weeding out larger ones, I will humbly say I still disagree with that practice.

quote:

---

one aspect each with a tight orb involving the inner planets and/or angles, and if u believe so asteroids.
thats all it takes , to qualify as a soulbased match given the constraints of mathematical probability, given you choose to believe in that either.
hope it sinks in.
also Fayte m. a member here is one person you want to talk to about soul clusters/ www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/015360
.you obviously think when i say soulmates, its someone who has a wonderful past life connection that goes all the way into the soul and an ordinary relationship just cant match. NOT SO.try googling on soul clusters and soul families or ask Fayte, she has done extensive research on the same AND you may want to check the thread that talks of her synastry, with her soul cluster mate.a twin soul is the split half of ur soul .at the time of inception into Physical reality which by nature being dual,-- a soul splits into masculine and feminine .its not some voodoo concept I am posing as fact but something that is based on the concept of Dualist metaphysics that Linda,Steiner, Einstein,Buddhism,Hinduism etc subscribe to...yin and yang....

---

Newsflash, I NEVER once in this entire thread questioned your definition of a soulmate. If I remember correctly, I made a thread saying I don't see the difference between a twin flame and a soulmate, thats about the only time where I questioned that. You pointed some threads out to me, i read them and understood where you were coming from. It was as simple as that. Speaking for myself, sorry but i'm not one to just accept things without question.

With all that said Venusdeindia, I still offer you a handshake of peace. There is no reason why it should have to go to this when someone questions the status quo. I'm sure I don't need to give any history lessons here about the effects of not doing or doing so.

I still think you and IQhunk are GREAT astrologers and have a vast understanding on the subject. I still enjoy reading your posts and learning about new asteroids, angles, concepts, and their effects. So I humbly apologize again if I offended you in anyway. (Yes, in the above replies to your quotes, I had to speak my mind but my offer of peace is still sincere.)

posted June 20, 2008 02:01 PM         

When I said everyone has their own truth and paradigm I was in a very high pre-full moon spiritual state having just meditated - and I was coming from the cosmic perspective where everyone's reality / paradigm is equally true...for the individual as a soul on earth on the path of evolution. But there is a higher truth that older souls all see...a universal truth that comes from the wisdom and experience of thousands and thousands of lives on this planet (and others).

venusdeindia and iqhunk, I completely share your views and see the same higher reality and higher truth that you do.

This site has been taken over by newbies who want only to tell their fortune in relationships and have it validated by astrology or who ask questions that can be answered by employing a simple Google search or even a search here at Lindaland. Maybe it's the Mercury RX...I don't know. But all the advanced astrologers from this site seem to have disappeared.

posted June 20, 2008 02:13 PM         

I am the member that has lost her password for a time.
And yes, I wrote that mail to Venus de India.

I didn`t want it to be published here, not with that tone, because honestly, it was written in a very "anti"-mood, and I was overly upset.
I`m actually disappointed that Venus de India used it here, but I guess it was just a misunderstnading and she though I wanted her to publish it here.

However, I apologize for the TONE of that mail, because I agree, it comes across as arrogant, but I stand by what I said.
And honestly, we all say everyone is entitled to their opinions, but don`t we all think deep inside that we are right and the others are wrong?
If we didn`T think that way, we wouldn`T even bother having an opinion.

But let`s put that aside and continue.

"Though you and whoever wrote that email would like to believe that I and others want to include larger orbed aspects based on some silly wishful thinking or, as the email author so rudely and WRONGLY put it, "AStrology becomes nothing more than a tool to wallow in your own illusions, but really not useful for getting a clear picture anymore.","
What was so rude with this statement?
I was just voicing my observation, which of course is dependent on MY perception, which is as flawed as anyone else`s, what I think and feel.
Sometimes I get the feeling that we all are reaching - myself included- and often using astronomically wide orbs can be used to satisfy our desire to see what we want to see.
Of course this is a completely unproven assumption, I make here. But it`s the impression I got. And again I am including myself here. Of course I have done this myself, too. Using 10° for a conjunction in synastry for example.

"Then you two (you and the email author) stoop so low as to insinuate that I and others who also question the orbs have no respect for traditional astrology and don’t think there are basic rules"
Hmm, maybe I expressed it wrongly, but I didn`t want to say you have no respect for traditional astrology. Actually I guess I am the one who hasn`t got the right respect for traditional astrology, because as far as I know, traditional astrology uses very wide orbs.

Also, I didn`t mean specifically you or others on this thread, it was the general impression I got, that lately there has been a lot of "changing" the symbols, which causes much confusion (yes, I`m speaking of Magi astrology and the confusion about Juno and Chiron here).
And for everyone there seems to be the "astrology" that fits his wishes.

posted June 20, 2008 02:13 PM         

So, the question remains what are these rules?

To me the best way to find the rules (for me) is to compare many charts with each other and see if the rules apply.

I have found some rules to be proven over and over again.

1. in close relationships there seems to be a tight interconnection between the ruler of the angles and the angles, mostly through conjunction.

2. there are tight to exact conjunctions and oppositions in relationships (I don`t call them "meaningful", because that is definitely a matter of intepretation and how you define a meaningful relationship)

3. progressed Venus-synastry seems to work almost always (I have never seen a case, when it failed) - and Paul WEstran did a very extensive study on this.

I think larger orbs may be valid, but I`m not sure about it.
I think there should be at least ONE tight conjunction or opposition, or the relationship would maybe lack attraction or glue.

Also, I haven`t seen a single relationship, that has lasted for several years, that was BASED on larger orbed aspects without having tight aspects at the same time.

Another thing is that astrology is a science of "observation", and that there seems to be the basic rule, that what happens in the sky, will happen on earth, too.
That is the reason I derived my own favourite orb from the astronomical case of a New-Moon or Full-moon.
A New-Moon is defined as the conjunction of Sun and Moon, as we all know, and the New Moon only lasts for a certain time, and after that it is not called New Moon anymore, and this is the time of about 6 hours, which equals to an orb of 3°, 3 for the exact NEw moon, 3 after the exact new moon.

To repeat it once again: I think the exact orbs are in the centre, and the larger orbed aspects are more in the background, maybe taking more time to be felt, I don`t know.

This is my opinion on this matter, and since I am in an arrogant phase, as it seems, I will admit that I think I am right. But if I didn`t think this way, this wouldn`t be my opinion.

But I also know that others, like you, will disagree heartily,a nd it`s okay. Disagree with me (I`m a lot calmer now than I was at the beginning of the week), there are a lot of astrologers who would agree with you rather than with me.
So I guess, your astrology is just not the same as mine, but each of us has to find their own way, and my way is the way of (small) statistical research.

BTW I do think that you shouldn`t be a slave to small orbs, because there can always be modification through other aspects.

I hope I didn`t offend anyone with THIS post of mine. I really don`t want to contribute to all this drama.

DD

posted June 20, 2008 04:00 PM         

Ive been missing your posts BTW..i never thought it would be you who would have emailed that to VenusdeIndia hihihih

We all have those moments of being upset - dont worry and im sure Venus didnt posted that in/by thew wrong way..

i also agree with you,that Astrology is a Science and not guesswork - it was already used by Egypthians whom i consider till now one of the most elevated and inteligent People of all Era´s

Tigerlily

dont be so upset - if i didnt posted it soon - here it goes - thanks so much for the list of asteroids.
Along with DD,Venus,lara,Taurus and many others,we appreciated very much your efforts about the asteroids ( personally i love to study them).

posted June 20, 2008 04:31 PM         

I'm posting this from my phone so I can't quote anything but I will talk to you more when I get home. And like I said DD, now that I understand where you are coming from, I have no probs with you.

Tigerlily, WOW... Thats all I will say until you let me know who your reply is directed at. I'll refrain from replying to your post until I know.

posted June 20, 2008 05:55 PM         

OK -

TIGERLILY - l for one totally appreciate your input here and l know others do too so please don't be ****** off

Venus - yeah, l 110% agree with you over valentine. As you know l have a valentine/AC trine DW (under 2 deg) with my SO and l am with him now AND IT'S MORE AMAZING than the last time l saw him.

Everyone else - Mercury rx is now over so can we all kiss and make-up please? We are ALL an important piece of the Lindaland jigsaw puzzle so let's all get along!

posted June 20, 2008 09:28 PM         

I'm also recovering from spinal surgery that I had at the end of April, my 2nd surgery in less than a year and a half (the other surgery was emergency surgery to remove my gallbladder). My health has been very bad for the past two years and to top it off I've been on heavy painkillers for all that time and now I'm in the process of trying to wean off them...but I spend about 6-8 hours a day in withdrawal. So I've been up and down to say the least.

I apologize for my outburst. I was in a bad mood when I posted.

posted June 20, 2008 10:01 PM         

quote:

---

FYI, you and mercury can keep calling my self expression whatever, this is a free speech forum , so feel free to rant all you want.pull me down, pull your panties into a bunch , do what you want. its your party.

---

quote:

---

Now this is just ridiculous. Pull you down? Panties in a bunch? You make me laugh with this nonsense.

YOU are the one who became stand-offish.

---

Don't we all just feel like putting our panties in a bunch some days? LOL

posted June 21, 2008 03:06 AM         

quote:

---

However, its not THAT serious.

---

quote:

---

As far as using probability as a basis to validate using only tight orbs and weeding out larger ones, I will humbly say I still disagree with that practice.

---

the probability was used becoz---- i hope this is clear... in one life we are lucky to find even one soulmate, be it as a family, friend or lover.its takes a lot of luck i'd say lik in my case to run into so many connections, parents, 2 friends, two here on LL,lover...so well the probablility didnt work in my case...

but the idea was that in an ordinary case, it wouldnt be more than one or two such connections in a lifetime.so out of the population of the country you are living in, it would have to take into account that probability...in my case out of 100 million Indians....i know it sounds illogical, and my case it is, but it was well intentioned.you will find sites on the net, astro and otherise where everyione comes up with synastry that could be just a fling wanting to hear its a soulmatch.the probability was reitertaed to add realism.not to negate the possibilites and realities as u pointed out.

quote:

---

I NEVER once in this entire thread questioned your definition of a soulmate

---

well, u said what mercury said was what you wanted to communicate....thats what she meant.did you read her post well before you agreed to it....?

quote:

---

It's one thing to say "here's the math" and it's another thing to push irrational dogmatic thinking about completely unscientific notions like "karma" and "past lives" under the guise of science. Venus, I'm talking specifically to you.

---

THAT is why i responded to you the way i did, given u posted you agreed to that.
i now realise from your response you didnt mean to share that accusation...so you can just forget the rest of my response or the exaggeration.
and i accept you handshake

posted June 21, 2008 03:10 AM         

dont be ****** off...
nd yes i agree about the newbies..we were like that when we started too. right

quote:

---

This site has been taken over by newbies who want only to tell their fortune in relationships and have it validated by astrology or who ask questions that can be answered by employing a simple Google search or even a search here at Lindaland. Maybe it's the Mercury RX...I don't know. But all the advanced astrologers from this site seem to have disappeared.

Is there an astrology board out there for more advanced astrologers? One where we can compare notes and continue the pioneering research of asteroids, Draconics, solstice points, etc.?

---

i know...tell me about it. if u find that place tell me.
and also i did appreciate the list u posted...its gonna be on my hard disk for all eternity to come

posted June 21, 2008 03:10 AM         

lara

yeah a lot can happen in 24 hrs

CoralFrequency

you imp

quote:

---

PS. Do I sense sexual tension? Me thinks we just found ourselves a soulmate couple in GotGem and Venus

---

posted June 21, 2008 03:46 AM         

I also dislike the arrogance.

I do like the enthusiasm.

Edited June 22: I get wary when people are too sure and then get defensive about differing points of view. But I'm sending love to you all :-)

posted June 21, 2008 04:24 AM         

I don`t feel like there is an elitist attitude here.
Quite the contrary I feel that many people are taking their time to answer newbie`s questions with much patience, and Venus de India is definitely one of them.

But even though I don´t see this elitist attitude you`re speaking of, I see that we all have strong beliefs and convictions, ALL of us. And maybe we have been expressing these convictions less diplomatic and more straightforward during this Mercury RX.

But of course everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Just I still will say (and I don`t want to start an argument over this, I`m only voicing my conviction), that I`m relying very much on research, as small as it may be.
If something seems to work in most charts, I feel more certain, that it will work in my chart, too.

Also, I think that most of us tend to overload the charts, and lose the overview. And I`m definitely guilty of this one.
We get lost in details (with maybe too many asteroids for example).

And I`m just seeking for the "primary relationship indicators" as Westran calls them.
To me tight orbs are primary, but as I said under certain circumstances wider orbs seem to work, too.
Certain circumstances could be rolling conjunctions or connected aspects for example.
Also,let`s not forget that even planets in signs (without orbs) have a certain relationship to each other.
A Moon in Aries will probably get along with a Moon in Leo, no matter what orb.
But what is different, is the intensity of the interaction.

Venus de India,

I knew that it must have been a misunderstanding, fit Mercury Rx, doesn`t it?

Tiger Lily,

I hope I have already thanked you for all the effort you made. If I should have forgotten it, i`m doing it here. Thank you.

And I hope you recover very quickly from all your health-troubles.

posted June 21, 2008 09:38 AM         

Venus, when I agreed to Mercury, I agreed in principle to what was said. The PS was actually added after I said I agreed. I just think this whole thing got way out of hand and like true knowflakes, we are here peacing it up! Now that is a beautiful thing!

quote:

---

PS. Do I sense sexual tension? Me thinks we just found ourselves a soulmate couple in GotGem and Venus

---

Hey Venus, you do know how romantic I am right? I would like to take you on the most romantic date you have ever been on in your life!

I'll describe our perfect date because you know I know how to treat the ladies!

First, i'll pick you on my bike, here is a pic of it:

You can ride on the back of the seat or the handlebars. Yeah, I know, I just made your heart skip a beat. I can't help that, that is usually what happens when I approach a woman. And don't you worry about the rain getting on your dress because I have splash guards on my tires. I'm ALWAYS prepared baby.

Then, we can go to my favorite restaurant and get a few delicacies. Here is a pic of my favorite place to eat. I KNOW you are gonna LOVE it.

posted June 21, 2008 09:39 AM         

From there, we can go back to my place and get some desert. I have made some Tang ice cups just for me and you. Mmmm Mmmmm Mmmmmm!!!! I can't wait!

Oh, here is a pic of my pimped out place, (and oh, thats my little cousin house sitting for me. Don't mind him.

Then after our dessert, we can listen to music on my transistor radio and watch TV on my big screen 13" black and white TV. I have an EXTENSIVE collection of betamax videos. (I can't show pictures of my collection here because someone might try to rob me. But here is a pic of my TV:

Then after that, I want to take you on a romantic tour of the sewage plant across the street from my house. You know, to show the you inner workings of the place. I know what you are thinking right now, you probably want to skip just skip the romantic date and ask for my hand in marriage because I am such a catch.

Here is a pic of the plant:

posted June 21, 2008 09:39 AM         

Here is my oracle:

Oh! Here is a pic of me! I almost forgot! This was taken after one of my wrestling matches a few weeks ago. Feast your eyes on me and try not to drool:

posted June 21, 2008 10:09 AM         

quote:

---

Hey Venus, you do know how romantic I am right? I would like to take you on the most romantic date you have ever been on in your life!

---

wait....you are a male